"There will be no serious public support for pressure against the background of relations with Armenia"

An initiative was put forward in the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe to limit the powers of Azerbaijan. As a result, on January 24, PACE deputies approved resolution No. 15898 on depriving the Azerbaijani delegation of the right to vote before the January 2025 PACE session.

The initiative to limit the powers of Azerbaijan was put forward by German MP Frank Schwabe. He cited the ongoing human rights violations in Azerbaijan and the growing number of political prisoners as the reason, as well as the refusal of official Baku to invite a PACE delegation to assess the upcoming presidential elections on February 7. He recalled that Azerbaijan refused to allow PACE speakers into the Lachyn corridor in 2023.

Before the meeting, the delegation of the Republic of Azerbaijan to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe made a statement. The statement said that no one in the world, including those in this hall, can speak to Azerbaijan in the language of threats and blackmail. After reading out the statement, the delegation left the building of the organization.

Meanwhile, the European Union's High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Josep Borrel, accused Azerbaijan of encroaching on Armenia's sovereignty and stated that "Any violation of Armenia's territorial integrity is unacceptable and will have serious consequences for our relations with Azerbaijan."

The simultaneous statement of two European organizations against Azerbaijan in this form is perceived ambiguously.

PACE claims - the problem of political prisoners and human rights mentioned in this statement has been around for many years.  But PACE, while raising these issues, has never taken such steps.   

What prompted PACE to do this now? Are the steps taken by two influential European organizations a coincidence?

Political commentator Nasimi Mammadli answers these questions in an interview with ASTNA.

* * *

Question: The problems of political prisoners and human rights have existed in Azerbaijan for many years.  But PACE, touching on these problems, has never taken such steps. What happened now that prompted PACE to take this step?

Answer: It would be naive to associate this PACE step with the state of human rights and democracy in Azerbaijan. We did not see an adequate PACE approach at a time when human rights in the country were violated more than ever, and repression against civil society was total. If European institutions and countries had taken a principled position in this direction 20 years ago, the democratic processes in the country would not have been dealt such a heavy blow.

I have concluded that Azerbaijan receives more criticism from the West after fully ensuring its territorial integrity and sovereignty. It is as if the fact that Azerbaijan, observing international law, expelled the occupiers from its territory, putting an end to separatism, caused disappointment and anger in some Western circles. Such will have not been shown in relation to Armenia, which has occupied 20% of our country's territory for 30 years.

Question: Is it a coincidence that two influential European organizations took this step at the same time? In addition, given the recent resolution of the French Senate demanding sanctions against Azerbaijan, is there a disagreement between Azerbaijan and the West on some issue? Or is there no agreement on some issue and the West wants to put pressure on Azerbaijan in this form?

Answer: Of course, this is not an accident. The resolutions adopted by the Council of Europe and the Parliamentary Assembly of the European Union against Azerbaijan immediately after the anti-terrorist operation on September 19, 2023, were completely biased. The reaction of the West to the steps taken by Azerbaijan in accordance with international law has caused surprise and regret among active segments of society. The international structures of Europe act against Azerbaijan mainly under the influence of France. The approach of most Western states is unacceptable, especially in matters related to Armenia.

The latest step taken by PACE is especially beneficial for official Baku. I do not think the government will suffer from this. Persecution and repression of the opposition and independent civil society in the country may increase. Society is indifferent to any tension arising in relations with the West. In Azerbaijan, the attitude towards the West has deteriorated significantly compared to the 90s.

In March 2017, at the Board of Directors of the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI - Global Standard for Oil, Gas and Mineral resources Management. It is intended to promote open governance and accountability in the oil, gas and mineral resources sectors and resolve key issues in the oil, gas and mining sectors – Ed.) It was decided to suspend Azerbaijan's activities on the Board of this structure.  Following this decision, representatives of the Azerbaijani Government immediately left the EITI. It was as if the government was waiting for such an opportunity. There were several easily solvable conditions put forward by the EITI to the Azerbaijani government. The Government purposefully failed to fulfill these conditions and created conditions for deciding against him.

Question: All this is happening on the eve of the elections... Is there any possible connection with the elections?

Answer: I do not think it has anything to do with the election. In countries where there are no democratic elections, international pressure often has the opposite effect. Sometimes this further strengthens anti-democratic regimes. This factor is well known to the political centers of the West.

Democratic elections have not been held in Azerbaijan for 30 years. We have been a member of the Council of Europe for 23 years and no elections have been assessed as democratic during this time.  The critical position of international organizations regarding the elections has no effect on the outcome of anti-democratic elections. It also had no negative impact on the economic and trade relations of the West with the government of Azerbaijan.  At the same time, criticism of the West does not cause political activity or protest in society.

Question: Some experts believe that all this is happening because of Azerbaijan's rapprochement with Russia. The West wants to punish Azerbaijan in some way for this. How logical is this version?     

Answer: This approach is completely devoid of any logic. What is the manifestation of Azerbaijan's rapprochement with Russia? Are there any specific facts? There are no positive answers to these questions. On the contrary, Azerbaijan has dealt the heaviest blow to Russia's military and political influence in the South Caucasus in recent years. The final resolution of the Karabakh issue basically eliminated Russia's political and military influence on Azerbaijan. An exhibition-museum of disabled products of the Russian military industry has been created in the War Trophies Park. I have no doubt that the Russian peacekeepers will leave Azerbaijan after the expiration of their term of office. Russia's economic ties have been further strengthened with Armenia and Georgia, not with Azerbaijan.

Finding the courage to criticize the United States and the heads of the largest European countries, President of Ukraine V. Zelensky, at every opportunity mentions the support of official Baku.

 He openly expresses his gratitude. Even in the last vote in PACE, he did not speak out against Azerbaijan. If Azerbaijan were very close to Russia, would it help Ukraine? Of course not. From a tactical point of view, it is now truer that official Baku does not make statements that would annoy Russia, does not express a harsh reaction on a number of issues. This factor does not mean rapprochement with Russia at all. The distance between Azerbaijan and Russia is the same as it was 15-20 years ago. The Kremlin simply turned a blind eye to a number of steps taken by Azerbaijan due to poor relations with the Armenian government.

If today the Baltic and Scandinavian countries are concerned about the Russian threat and are strengthening security measures, then normal relations with Russia, which has more than 390 km of land and sea borders with Azerbaijan, meet our national interests. It is a mistake to think that Azerbaijan is making a strategic choice at a time of geopolitical upheavals associated with the formation of a new world order.

Question: The Government of Azerbaijan is focusing on the issue of the Lachyn corridor. Some experts also believe that it is precisely because of the Karabakh issue that the West is putting pressure on Azerbaijan. What do you think about this?

Answer: The West is interested in ousting Russia from the South Caucasus and entering this region in a new status. To this end, it  demonstrates different approaches to the countries of the region. It provides Georgia with the status of a candidate for EU membership, and Armenia with numerous incentives. The location of the EU civil mission on the Armenian border is related to this. The claim that Azerbaijan is going to attack Armenia is absurd.  And Azerbaijan, by exerting pressure on it using the Armenian issue, wants to dictate its will. He set a course to accuse Azerbaijan because of the Armenians who voluntarily left Karabakh.

In no case should Azerbaijan participate in the geopolitical rivalry and contradictions between the West and Russia. The current geopolitical realities require that good relations with neighbors be a priority. It is difficult to predict what political and military events will take place in our region in the coming period. We need to act accordingly to each situation. The processes are fast and changeable. Making a final and unambiguous decision is risky.

If you remember, the President of the EU Sh.Michel has repeatedly addressed Armenia and Azerbaijan, recalling the importance of observing the statements of November 10, 2020, January 11, 2021, November 26, 2021. It was in these documents that Armenia undertook to open the shortest and most convenient route connecting Azerbaijan with Nakhchivan. But Armenia still does not fulfill its obligation.  

As a result, I would like to note that the situation with human rights and democracy in Azerbaijan is poor. If the government of Azerbaijan is under pressure from the West in this direction, then there will be much more open support from society. But there will be no serious public support for the pressure against the background of relations with Armenia. No one, with the exception of certain marginal groups, will justify this pressure.